Eugene Makupa v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., No. 12-1636 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Petition for Review - Immigration. Immigration judge did not abuse his discretion by denying petitioner's request for a continuance.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 12-1636 ___________________________ Eugene E. Makupa lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: December 5, 2012 Filed: December 10, 2012 [Unpublished] ____________ Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Eugene Makupa, a native and citizen of Tanzania, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, which upheld an immigration judge s decision denying his request for a continuance of his removal proceedings and finding him subject to removal. Makupa asserts that the immigration judge should have granted him the requested continuance. After careful review, we conclude that it was not an abuse of discretion for the immigration judge to deny Makupa the continuance, given that the removal proceedings had already been continued multiple times over a period of more than five years during the pendency of I-130 petitions filed on his behalf. See Thimran v. Holder, 599 F.3d 841, 845 (8th Cir. 2010) (IJ did not abuse discretion in denying alien s request for continuance after second I-130 petition was denied and case had been continued for over two years). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review.1 See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 We do not consider new evidence that Makupa has presented in this court. See Lukowski v. INS, 279 F.3d 644, 646 (8th Cir. 2002) ( judicial review is limited to the administrative record ). -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
